🚀 go-pugleaf

"Carter Lee" <crlee@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3E6FC738.3080400@ns.sympatico.ca...
> Glen Hallick wrote:
>

snip.

>
> > Are they any American hating rightists?
>
> There probably are but hating Americans is not a prerequisite to belong
> to the more conservative faction of our society as it apparently is on
> the left.


So then to criticize and question any of the policies of the US government
is to hate the country. Is this what you are saying?

snip.


>
> > Twisting words again Carter? I have made it very clear that I do not
disgree
> > with disarming the Iraqi military of its WDM's.
>
> Then you would agree with disarmament by force if Iraq refuses to do it
> voluntarily?

Nope.

Besides Iraq is hardly doing this voluntarily. To say it is being coerced is
probably more accurate.


snip.

>
> > What threat does Iraq pose to the US?
>
> It is a destabilizing influence on the Middle East, a very economically
> important part of the world.  Because we don't live in a vacuum it is
> therefore a threat to most of the world.

Exactly how is Iraq a destabilizing influence in the Middle East. Other than
Iraq invading Iran in 1980, to which the US and the West were quite happy
with, and the invasion of Kuwait in 1990, what else has Iraq done to
destablize the region?

Ever think that Iraqi civilians, regardless of what they may think of
Saddamn Hussein, see the US and the UK as a threat?



>
>   It's military is still a shadow of its
> > former self after getting the shit kicked out of it by the US and its
> > coalition.
>
> The you don't need to worry, the 'war' will not be long and very few, if
> any, innocent civilians will be killed.

You can guarantee this?


snip.

> > Kuwait and Iraq were in a dispute over oil drilling. Iraq charged that
> > Kuwait was taking oil from Iraqi territory.
>
> Yes we know that.  How does that show a similarity 'between Iraq's
> invasion of Kuwait back in 1990 and the war Bush et al are pushing for
> today.'

War of aggression.



> > BBBWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! You're quite the comedian Carter.
>
> Another of your cogent remarks I take it?

Yup.


>
>
> >>The
> >>problem is that to you leftists anybody who refuses to be bullied by
> >>regimes such as that led by Saddam Hussein is pro-war.
>
> > More of your bullshit covered spin.
>
> Out of reasoned argument are we?

Not at all. Just waiting for your reasoned arguements.

snip.

>
> > If you are not pro-war then in last few weeks you have changed your
mind.
>
> Not at all, if anything I am even more convinced that Iraq has to be
> disarmed.  If that eventually requires force I support it.

Oooooohhhh I see, to you it is now "eventually". Gees dude you sure weren't
talking like that a while ago. You were practically foaming at the mouth in
supporting a war.


>
> > You and I have tangled over this issue from quite some time, it is quite
> > clear you are very much in favour of a war.
>
> You obviously have not been paying attention to what I have been saying.


What's that?


>
>
> >>If you believe that then you know nothing, and throughout our usenet
> >>conversations, have learned nothing about me but, go ahead, believe what
> >>you will.
>
> > I have learned you're a hard-core right-winger with a deep seeded hatred
to
> > anything that is or perceived to be left-wing.
>
> See, I told you, you have learned nothing about me.  I guess '..deep
> seeded hatred..' is more left wing rhetoric?

I think I have learned a fair bit about you. The bottom line? You're just a
right-wing loon. The type that sees a boogie man in anything that's
left-wing.



>
>   You have on occassion made
> > claims of having been employed in the intelligence field.
>
> Not claims, statements of fact.


Well I didn't want to say something that wasn't accurate. I have no evidence
your statements regarding your past employed so to me what you have said
about working in the intelligence field are just claims. I could choose to
accept what you say as the truth, but there hasn't been anything to lead to
making such a choice.


>   You have also made
> > claims of defending democracy, yet given your vemonous streak towards
the
> > left I sometime wonder what you were defending.
>
> Democracy, what else.  What's this '..venomous streak..' more left wing
> rhetoric?

You most certainly do hate the Left.


> > Seems to me turning a blind eye to from who Iraq acquired its WDM's is
> > allowing a guilty party to get off.
>
> What guilty party?  If the US, or any other country, sold arms to Iraq
> prior to UN resolution 661 what exactly would it be guilty of?


Exposing them, demonstrating to the world just who did business with Iraq.
You certainly want to turn a blind eye to this, but I would like to know how
and when Iraq got these weapons or the technology for them.


>
>
> >>Yes, but have they come out with any relatively sure way of disarming
> >>Iraq while Saddam is in charge?  No!
>
> > Allow me to apply that question to you. Other than war, you haven't
> > mentioned anyother means.
>
> That is because I am realistic enough to realize there is no other way.


Those who support war prefer to it see that way. Close the mind, narrow the
vision, claim there are no other alternatives, this must be the way. It goes
on, the mindless chanting of the pro-war crowd.

>   It is abundantly apparent after some 12 years that Iraq has no
> intention of being persuaded by any peaceful means to disarm.

Oh?

Are you suggesting that the previous weapon inspection teams never found any
WDM's?


> Now what is your solution?


My solution is to use this opportunity for greater weapons reductions in the
Middle East. Perhaps if Iraq's neighbours and other countries in the region
agreed to get rid of all or part of their WDM's there would be more
progress.

> >>>When you shove your anti-left blathering up your arse...sideways...then
> >>>perhaps you and I can make a little progress discussing this issue.
> >>
> >>Not until you shove your pro-war and 'drooling for war' bullshit up your
> >>arse.
>
> > From what I have seen on the Usenet, you are definately a leading
propenent
> > for war. Yet now you seem to be backing down.
>
> I am neither a leading proponent of war nor am I backing down from
> anything.

OK then, my apologies for accorded you too much credit. Of all of the posts
I have read on the war subject in various threads, I definately considered
you to be the leading propenent by far.


> I am a leading proponent of the position that when assholes
> like Hussein will not be persuaded peacefully they must be persuaded in
> the way they understand best, by force.

Regardless of the possible consequences?


>
> The difference between you and me is that you are not willing to
> recognize that in some cases force is necessary.

More of your ignorant bullshit Carter? When does it end?


> This is one of those
> cases, whether you recognize it or not.


To you, not to me. I do not see the requirement for the US and the UK along
with whatever coalition they have cobbled together to wage a war of
aggression by invading Iraq. Even you admit Iraq is hardly a military
threat. Sure numerically Iraq's army is large at some 375,000 troops but its
equipment is poor maintained with a sizeable chunk of it out of date. But to
some people "might makes right" make them feel good.


Glen